BOSTON (CN) - A First Circuit panel of Joe Biden-appointed judges seemed wary about reinstating a voting ban against a firebrand Maine legislator who had criticized a transgender high school athlete.

Earlier this year, Maine Representative Laurel Libby was censured by the state's Speaker of the House after she posted a photo on Facebook of a transgender student athlete who won a girls' pole vault event after placing fifth in similar boys' competition two years ago.

In the post, Libby mentioned the transgender athlete's name and included a photo of her face, which Speaker Ryan Fecteau had said could cause safety concerns. Libby refused, despite commenters on the post threatening the minor with violence, after which the Republican was officially censured following a party vote.

In her complaint against Fecteau and the House clerk, Libby says she was unconstitutionally prohibited from participating in any floor debates or having her vote counted unless she apologized, leaving her 9,000 constituents "without a voice or vote."

State officials argue the censure is a state issue and federal judges should not intervene in Maine's legislative process.

Earlier this year, a federal judge in Rhode Island declined Libby's request for an injunction, as did the First Circuit. Last month, however, the U.S. Supreme Court voted 7-2 to allow her to participate in debates and votes pending the outcome of her complaint. Libby tweeted that the ruling was "a win for free speech - and for the Constitution."

During oral arguments before the First Circuit on Thursday, Libby's attorney Taylor Meehan, of Consovoy McCarthy, argued Fecteau's decision to strip Libby's right to vote or speak in session was not protected by legislative immunity.

"Speaking and voting go hand in hand," Meehan said, adding Libby is not challenging any Maine Legislature rule. "We're not asking for her to have any lengthy amount of time to speak, just that when she pushes her button she is recognized like everyone else."

However, Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Bolton argued that as a state legislator Libby is not like everyone else and that Maine has had rules on the books since 1820 to allow banning state legislators from voting or speaking in session if they violated House rules without "making satisfaction."

In Libby's case, "making satisfaction" would mean an apology for identifying the transgender athlete in her post, which Libby has refused to offer. Bolton noted other states, such as Washington and Florida, once had similar rules on their books.

U.S. Circuit Judge Seth Aframe, who had most of the questions during oral arguments, worried about setting a precedent where courts could insert themselves into "the machinations" of state legislatures. "I mean, bad or good, how does [this case] not get us into the middle of the House's regulation of itself?" Aframe asked.

Aframe repeatedly hammered Meehan on why the First Circuit should get "down in the mud" on how the Maine Legislature deals with its members, particularly on whether to allow legislators to speak. "For the voting you have actually some really good stuff," he said. "But you don't have that for the speaking [argument]."

Meehan responded that the ban on Libby speaking during the remainder of her term also affects her "right to vote" on matters in the state Legislature. "Every other legislator can get up and explain their vote and make a floor speech, share the views of their constituents and try to change the minds of their colleagues," Meehan said. "Her vote in that way is diluted."

Justice Department attorney Harmeet Dhillon sided with Libby but focused almost entirely on the legislator's right to vote, arguing that aspect of the censure violates the 14th Amendment.

The First Circuit panel could be hesitant to step on the Supreme Court's toes after the high court ordered Libby be allowed to vote until the matter was determined.

Bolton argued the high court decision that reinstated Libby's right to vote was not dispositive on whether Libby's right to speak on the House floor be reinstated and criticized it for lacking any reasoning.

"You're asking us to reach a conclusion or are going to argue for something that is at odds with that," Aframe said about the Supreme Court's brief court order. "I know reasoning is nice ... but at the end of the day courts are about judgments. And they issued a judgment."

Aframe was joined on the panel by U.S. Circuit Judge Lara Montecalvo and U.S. District Judge Camille Velez-Rive, who was visiting from the District of Puerto Rico. All three were appointed by Biden.

Maine has been a state central to the debate over transgender athletes. Earlier this year, the Trump administration sued the state for refusing the comply with a newly enacted ban on transgender athletes in women's sports. Maine Governor Janet Mills told Trump "see you in court" after he asked if the state was going to comply with his new rule.

Libby is no stranger to controversy either. She has tweeted and posted on her official Facebook account numerous times about transgender athletes. She also had her committee assignments stripped in 2021 after she refused to comply with mask mandates in the Maine House.

In 2024, Libby opposed a bill to restrict unauthorized paramilitary training. While speaking against the bill, she infamously said referenced neo-Nazi demonstrations in the state in 2023, saying "I would like to know what they did that was illegal ... what they did that was wrong, that infringed on another person's right."

Source: Courthouse News Service